Try this website:
This is the website Dr. Halterman recommends you read to find out more about vaccines.
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Going to a High Altitude?
If you have ever had altitude sickness, you know it stinks. You can literally think you have the flu. It can not only ruin your vacation, but land you in the hospital if you aren't careful.
When I worked at Brazos Natural Foods, I was lucky enough to work with a woman who had run a ranch in Wyoming. Now this is a woman who knows about altitude sickness! She said to start taking choraphyl a month before leaving and then during your trip. You get altitude sickness from a lack of oxygen to your cells. Red blood cells make oxygen. Choraphyl enables your body to make more red blood cells, therefore more oxygen, and therefore, less altitude sickness. Ask your local health food store what brands most people have the most luck with
Also, make sure you drink plenty of water. There are brands of water that have extra oxygen pumped into them.... your health food stores, and specialty stores will have them.
As inconvenient as it is, traveling slowly, by car to your higher altitude is preferable to flying if you get altitude sickness. I, for one, do get altitude sickeness, but if I drive, I don't. I have given my body a full 48 hours to adapt.
Of course I also take a lot of Co Q 10, (minimum 300mg/day) which increases your body's oxygen. Smile.
And another thing, and this I got from an emergency room doctor in Colorado....don't drink while you are on vacation at a high altitude. Alcohol is dehydrating. This doctor said the number one person visiting their ER is always an out of state hunter, come to capture the big game with the boys during the day, and drink all night as if they were back in college. It is not unusual for these idiots to have to be life flighted to the hospital.
Did you learn something? I hope so!
When I worked at Brazos Natural Foods, I was lucky enough to work with a woman who had run a ranch in Wyoming. Now this is a woman who knows about altitude sickness! She said to start taking choraphyl a month before leaving and then during your trip. You get altitude sickness from a lack of oxygen to your cells. Red blood cells make oxygen. Choraphyl enables your body to make more red blood cells, therefore more oxygen, and therefore, less altitude sickness. Ask your local health food store what brands most people have the most luck with
Also, make sure you drink plenty of water. There are brands of water that have extra oxygen pumped into them.... your health food stores, and specialty stores will have them.
As inconvenient as it is, traveling slowly, by car to your higher altitude is preferable to flying if you get altitude sickness. I, for one, do get altitude sickeness, but if I drive, I don't. I have given my body a full 48 hours to adapt.
Of course I also take a lot of Co Q 10, (minimum 300mg/day) which increases your body's oxygen. Smile.
And another thing, and this I got from an emergency room doctor in Colorado....don't drink while you are on vacation at a high altitude. Alcohol is dehydrating. This doctor said the number one person visiting their ER is always an out of state hunter, come to capture the big game with the boys during the day, and drink all night as if they were back in college. It is not unusual for these idiots to have to be life flighted to the hospital.
Did you learn something? I hope so!
Inspiration
Here are some nuggets of inspiration.
If you think you can't, you can't. If you think you can, you can.
If you can dream it, you can achieve it.
Thoughts become things. Make yours good ones.
In applying these to health, start thinking of yourself as healthy. Whenever you think about your disease, think about that part of your body as well and functioning. Whenever you think about the lack of wholistic healthcare providers in your life, think about how God has put this blog into your life for inspiration. Begin to think about what your holistic healthcare providers will be like. Ask God to send them to you, and to provide ways to pay for them. Imagine yourself finding them and finding a way to pay for them.
And log onto www.peoplesrx.com until you find local holistic healthcare providers. Call the pharmacists, doctors, and nutrition counselors at any one of their locations. You will never find any better pharmacists, etc., anywhere. Tell them about your doctor's diagnoses, and ask them what they have seen work best for other patients they have seen. (and they have seen a lot) If you have the money, order products from them. It pays them for their time, but it also insures that you will be getting the best viability of product. GOOD LUCK!
If you think you can't, you can't. If you think you can, you can.
If you can dream it, you can achieve it.
Thoughts become things. Make yours good ones.
In applying these to health, start thinking of yourself as healthy. Whenever you think about your disease, think about that part of your body as well and functioning. Whenever you think about the lack of wholistic healthcare providers in your life, think about how God has put this blog into your life for inspiration. Begin to think about what your holistic healthcare providers will be like. Ask God to send them to you, and to provide ways to pay for them. Imagine yourself finding them and finding a way to pay for them.
And log onto www.peoplesrx.com until you find local holistic healthcare providers. Call the pharmacists, doctors, and nutrition counselors at any one of their locations. You will never find any better pharmacists, etc., anywhere. Tell them about your doctor's diagnoses, and ask them what they have seen work best for other patients they have seen. (and they have seen a lot) If you have the money, order products from them. It pays them for their time, but it also insures that you will be getting the best viability of product. GOOD LUCK!
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
Gardisil, HPV vaccine
Let's start off with this from the insert on Gardasil...
see the bottom of page 8 for this stunning disclaimer:
"GARDASIL has not been evaluated for the potential to cause carcinogenicity or genotoxicity."
and page 9 for this admission:
"However, it is not known whether GARDASIL can cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman or if it can affect reproductive capacity."
This info I got at www.vaccineinfo.net
Yesterday I saw my chiropractor, Dr. Marcy Halterman. We discussed the HPV vaccine. She said so far, there have been 12 deaths from the vaccine!!!
Dr. Halterman also said that Gardasil had only been tested for 4 years (not the usual ten). She said we don't know the long term efficacy....no one has studied how long it will be effective. Will it be ten years, twenty years, or what? Are the short term risks worth the questionable length and quality of benefits with 12 deaths already reported?) As well, Gardasil only protects against 3 of the many strains of HPV viruses.(I have written about this before.) In eliminating these three, will it make the others stronger, to where they will be worse? That is something I had never thought of before she said it. And lastly, cervical cancer affects 4000 women a year, with 2000 of those treatable had they received routine pap smears. Out of the number of women worldwide ( at least a few billion) worth the risk of death from a vaccine to save a potential 2000 women. What are those percentages? Pretty small. Personally, I don't think it is worth the risk.
12 young girls dead from Gardasil, and that is just so far.
see the bottom of page 8 for this stunning disclaimer:
"GARDASIL has not been evaluated for the potential to cause carcinogenicity or genotoxicity."
and page 9 for this admission:
"However, it is not known whether GARDASIL can cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman or if it can affect reproductive capacity."
This info I got at www.vaccineinfo.net
Yesterday I saw my chiropractor, Dr. Marcy Halterman. We discussed the HPV vaccine. She said so far, there have been 12 deaths from the vaccine!!!
Dr. Halterman also said that Gardasil had only been tested for 4 years (not the usual ten). She said we don't know the long term efficacy....no one has studied how long it will be effective. Will it be ten years, twenty years, or what? Are the short term risks worth the questionable length and quality of benefits with 12 deaths already reported?) As well, Gardasil only protects against 3 of the many strains of HPV viruses.(I have written about this before.) In eliminating these three, will it make the others stronger, to where they will be worse? That is something I had never thought of before she said it. And lastly, cervical cancer affects 4000 women a year, with 2000 of those treatable had they received routine pap smears. Out of the number of women worldwide ( at least a few billion) worth the risk of death from a vaccine to save a potential 2000 women. What are those percentages? Pretty small. Personally, I don't think it is worth the risk.
12 young girls dead from Gardasil, and that is just so far.
Saturday, August 16, 2008
High Blood Pressure, Just Dash
DASH, stands for Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension. And the conclusion of the study is that "food has a more important role in diease prevention than we thought". Those are the words of Nieca Goldgerg, medical director of the New York University Women's Heart Program, who was not involved in the study.
This study was thorough! It included some 88,500 healthy women ages 34-59, followed for 24 years!
What is the DASH diet? High in fruits, vegetables and whole grains, and moderate in low dairy, nuts and legumes, and easy on read meat, sweets, and sodium. Women who followed this diet were 24% less likely to have a stroke.
I read the article on page 68 of U.S.NEWS AND WORLD REPORT. You can also access it at www.usnews.com. The issue is April 28/May 5, 2008.
If you have a relative who has high blood pressure, and won't even think about anything "natural", print out this study. Perhaps it will persuade them to eat better and thereby naturally lower their blood pressure.
This study was thorough! It included some 88,500 healthy women ages 34-59, followed for 24 years!
What is the DASH diet? High in fruits, vegetables and whole grains, and moderate in low dairy, nuts and legumes, and easy on read meat, sweets, and sodium. Women who followed this diet were 24% less likely to have a stroke.
I read the article on page 68 of U.S.NEWS AND WORLD REPORT. You can also access it at www.usnews.com. The issue is April 28/May 5, 2008.
If you have a relative who has high blood pressure, and won't even think about anything "natural", print out this study. Perhaps it will persuade them to eat better and thereby naturally lower their blood pressure.
Coconut Water
And this is one of the brands of coconut water. The company is http://wwww.amyandbriannaturals.com
Dehydration and Coconut Water
Dehydrated? Drink Coconut Water.
If it is summer in the south and you are sweating, drink coconut water. If you have been vomiting, drink coconut water. If you have had diahrrea, drink coconut water. Coconut water is the best isotonic (electrolyte) drink there is. It's better than Pedialyte, it's better than popping all the potassium and magnesium you can, it's better than EmergenC, It's better than eating all the bananas, potatoes and avocados you can. Don't ask me why, all I know is it is better.
I found this out working at the health food store. Smart mothers would come in for the stuff when their kids had become dehydrated from the normal diahrrea and vomiting assoicated with the flu, etc. One time I had been sick, and still wasn't 'popping'. I could cope but I didn't feel like I was really there--I was forcing myself to do everything. I had taken EmergenC, I had taken my potassium and magnesium, I had swallowed lots and lots of water. Then, Jenn, one of our managers got a can of coconut water and had me drink it. Viola! Within an hour, I popped! I felt like the old me. That experience taught me to always get coconut water if I, or anyone I know, is dehydrated from being sick.
About three days ago, I got dehydrated from being out in the Texas heat. I drank about a gallon and a half of water that day. I ate about two bananas. I took extra potassium and magnesium. I still felt horrible after 24 hours. Just like I described above, I was able to do things, but forcing it. And just plain old tired.
Somewhere in the far reaches of my dehydrated brain came the message, "coconut water, coconut water." As soon as the health food store opened, I bought a couple of containers, and drank them. Within about 15 minutes, I felt better. Within about a half an hour, I felt more like my old self. I had my energy pretty much back. And within an hour, I had pretty much forgotten how truly bad I had felt over the last 48hours.
You can find coconut water at all your health food stores, and some specialty or health areas of grocery stores. You can also order it online from Amazon and a variety of other places.
Just remember, if you are dehydrated, drink coconut water.
If it is summer in the south and you are sweating, drink coconut water. If you have been vomiting, drink coconut water. If you have had diahrrea, drink coconut water. Coconut water is the best isotonic (electrolyte) drink there is. It's better than Pedialyte, it's better than popping all the potassium and magnesium you can, it's better than EmergenC, It's better than eating all the bananas, potatoes and avocados you can. Don't ask me why, all I know is it is better.
I found this out working at the health food store. Smart mothers would come in for the stuff when their kids had become dehydrated from the normal diahrrea and vomiting assoicated with the flu, etc. One time I had been sick, and still wasn't 'popping'. I could cope but I didn't feel like I was really there--I was forcing myself to do everything. I had taken EmergenC, I had taken my potassium and magnesium, I had swallowed lots and lots of water. Then, Jenn, one of our managers got a can of coconut water and had me drink it. Viola! Within an hour, I popped! I felt like the old me. That experience taught me to always get coconut water if I, or anyone I know, is dehydrated from being sick.
About three days ago, I got dehydrated from being out in the Texas heat. I drank about a gallon and a half of water that day. I ate about two bananas. I took extra potassium and magnesium. I still felt horrible after 24 hours. Just like I described above, I was able to do things, but forcing it. And just plain old tired.
Somewhere in the far reaches of my dehydrated brain came the message, "coconut water, coconut water." As soon as the health food store opened, I bought a couple of containers, and drank them. Within about 15 minutes, I felt better. Within about a half an hour, I felt more like my old self. I had my energy pretty much back. And within an hour, I had pretty much forgotten how truly bad I had felt over the last 48hours.
You can find coconut water at all your health food stores, and some specialty or health areas of grocery stores. You can also order it online from Amazon and a variety of other places.
Just remember, if you are dehydrated, drink coconut water.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Sex: Better than Viagra
Sex: now that I have your attention.... One day, while I was working at the health food store, a couple came in and told me that this combination works better than Viagra. Sub lingual B-12, Goldenrod, and chamomile. I don't remember the amounts, but I believe it was one pill of each, taken at the same time. Good Luck!
Osteoarthritis: Lynn's story
The following is Lynn's story about her osteoarthritis in both knees and her success with chiropractic and acupuncture in treating it:
Dr. Witter has helped me tremendously. Before meeting Dr. Witter, I couldn’t bend my left knee. I couldn’t even roll over at night without it waking me up in pain. I limped when I walked. I hurt all the time.
Although I have osteoarthritis in both of my knees, my left knee is worse than my right but, due to various injuries, neither one has any cartilage left. I wish I could say the injuries were due to playing sports—something fun---but they weren’t. Even now with the excellent care of Dr. Witter and her staff, I have an electric scooter that I use when I am at the mall or shopping because pounding bone on bone for an extended period of time can be very painful.
I’ll never forget my first appointment with Dr. Witter. I cried in pain when she lifted my leg only two inches. She gave me my first chiropractic adjustment ever. Then she did acupuncture on me and gave me some exercises to do. I am religious about my exercises. I do them in exactly the way she taught me to, the exact number of times recommended. One thing I have learned is that more is not better with exercises. She also started me on chrondoitin, glucosomine, bromelain and horse chestnutt.
Within a week of that first appointment, I felt a difference. And within six weeks my leg could go up over my head! It was amazing! My orthopedist was so impressed, he refused to give me what was to be my first injection of artificial cartilage that I was scheduled for. He wanted her card and wanted to know exactly what she was doing. When I told him everything, including acupuncture, he said “I know acupuncture works. They’ve done it on dogs and dogs don’t know anything about the placebo affect.”
Our goal was for me to go dancing again. I just recently did this on my birthday and when I told Dr. Witter her face just lit up---she was so happy for me.
Susan again: Because of a former injury years ago, my husband has no cartilage on one of his knees. Within a few months of taking Sam-E, he could jog on that knee again. Soon, he could run.... and does, everyday now, four miles a day. This is a personal miracle in his life, and it may be for you as well.
Curtis had started Sam-E to help him access emotions, and this was an added fringe benefit. Off of the stuff, and he found, surprisingly, that he can access his emotions better, but he had to stop running because his knees hurt so much. Needless to say, he went back on Sam-E.
What does this mean to you? It means that if you have trouble accessing emotions and you don't have any cartilage, try Sam-E. Get a good brand. it also means, DON'T TAKE SAM E IF YOU ARE BIPOLAR!
Let me repeat that: DON'T TAKE SAM E IF YOU ARE BI POLAR OR EVEN HAVE BI POLAR TENDANCIES. One bipolar friend was taking Sam E, recommended by her wholistic chiropractor who had no idea my friend can so easily access so many emotions on both ends of the scale! When I saw her, she was a couple of weeks in taking Sam E and had overwhelming thoughts of suicide. She said she just couldn't imagine a reason to go on living. I had known her for a quarter of a century, and NEVER once had her problems so overwhelmed her.... and I had seen her suffer the loss of a husband as well as her mother and father. So, I immediately said, go off of your Sam E. She did. Within about 1-2 days, she was back to her old self again. She had been taking Sam E to improve her immune system. I told her, honey, there a lots of ways to improve your immune system! You don't have to take one that makes you suicidal to do so!
But let's get back to why I wrote this article: Sam E is great for building cartilage. If you have no serious mood swings, and you want to build cartilage, give it a try, perhaps in addition to chiropractic and acupuncture. If you have serious mood swings, then try chiropractic and acupuncture only. My point being, you have a lot of options. YEA!!!
Dr. Witter has helped me tremendously. Before meeting Dr. Witter, I couldn’t bend my left knee. I couldn’t even roll over at night without it waking me up in pain. I limped when I walked. I hurt all the time.
Although I have osteoarthritis in both of my knees, my left knee is worse than my right but, due to various injuries, neither one has any cartilage left. I wish I could say the injuries were due to playing sports—something fun---but they weren’t. Even now with the excellent care of Dr. Witter and her staff, I have an electric scooter that I use when I am at the mall or shopping because pounding bone on bone for an extended period of time can be very painful.
I’ll never forget my first appointment with Dr. Witter. I cried in pain when she lifted my leg only two inches. She gave me my first chiropractic adjustment ever. Then she did acupuncture on me and gave me some exercises to do. I am religious about my exercises. I do them in exactly the way she taught me to, the exact number of times recommended. One thing I have learned is that more is not better with exercises. She also started me on chrondoitin, glucosomine, bromelain and horse chestnutt.
Within a week of that first appointment, I felt a difference. And within six weeks my leg could go up over my head! It was amazing! My orthopedist was so impressed, he refused to give me what was to be my first injection of artificial cartilage that I was scheduled for. He wanted her card and wanted to know exactly what she was doing. When I told him everything, including acupuncture, he said “I know acupuncture works. They’ve done it on dogs and dogs don’t know anything about the placebo affect.”
Our goal was for me to go dancing again. I just recently did this on my birthday and when I told Dr. Witter her face just lit up---she was so happy for me.
Susan again: Because of a former injury years ago, my husband has no cartilage on one of his knees. Within a few months of taking Sam-E, he could jog on that knee again. Soon, he could run.... and does, everyday now, four miles a day. This is a personal miracle in his life, and it may be for you as well.
Curtis had started Sam-E to help him access emotions, and this was an added fringe benefit. Off of the stuff, and he found, surprisingly, that he can access his emotions better, but he had to stop running because his knees hurt so much. Needless to say, he went back on Sam-E.
What does this mean to you? It means that if you have trouble accessing emotions and you don't have any cartilage, try Sam-E. Get a good brand. it also means, DON'T TAKE SAM E IF YOU ARE BIPOLAR!
Let me repeat that: DON'T TAKE SAM E IF YOU ARE BI POLAR OR EVEN HAVE BI POLAR TENDANCIES. One bipolar friend was taking Sam E, recommended by her wholistic chiropractor who had no idea my friend can so easily access so many emotions on both ends of the scale! When I saw her, she was a couple of weeks in taking Sam E and had overwhelming thoughts of suicide. She said she just couldn't imagine a reason to go on living. I had known her for a quarter of a century, and NEVER once had her problems so overwhelmed her.... and I had seen her suffer the loss of a husband as well as her mother and father. So, I immediately said, go off of your Sam E. She did. Within about 1-2 days, she was back to her old self again. She had been taking Sam E to improve her immune system. I told her, honey, there a lots of ways to improve your immune system! You don't have to take one that makes you suicidal to do so!
But let's get back to why I wrote this article: Sam E is great for building cartilage. If you have no serious mood swings, and you want to build cartilage, give it a try, perhaps in addition to chiropractic and acupuncture. If you have serious mood swings, then try chiropractic and acupuncture only. My point being, you have a lot of options. YEA!!!
Selfish People Make Nice People Sick
I just got this in my email. The article calls selfish people narcissists...but it's the same thing. Selfish is just easier for everyone to identify with. Because I have been surrounded by selfish people throughout most of my life, and because I have been sick a lot, I can relate to this well. Read this and see if it sounds like someone you know. Then read what I have written at the bottom of the page.
Career Watch: Dealing with 'It's All About Me' syndrome
August 4, 2008 (Computerworld) This feature originally appeared in Computerworld's print edition. The 'It's All About Me' Syndrome
Five years ago, Jean Ritala had never heard the term narcissism. Then someone described her as having been "stung by a narcissist" and shared books and Web sites with her on the topic. Now, besides being the IT support services manager at Mystic Lake Casino Hotel in Prior Lake, Minn., Ritala educates and coaches others on how to deal with narcissists.
Narcissists show a pervasive need for attention and admiration and a lack of concern for others. But are they dangerous in the workplace?
"The cost to organizations from narcissism in the workplace is staggering," as the narcissist's co-workers become ill with stress, teamwork deteriorates, projects fail and turnover rises, says Ritala.
"Up to one-third of a narcissist's victims in the workplace will quit the company or transfer to another department if nothing is done" to address the behavior, she says.
Once she had become educated on the topic of narcissism, Ritala began to recognize narcissistic traits in the workplace. Feeling that it is a problem that is pervasive but too often ignored, she and management consultant Gerald Falkowski wrote a booklet on the topic, called Narcissism in the Workplace (Red Swan Publishing USA, 2007).
Ritala, former president of the IT Service Management Forum - U.S., spoke recently with Computerworld about dealing with narcissism in IT organizations.
Is narcissism prevalent within IT organizations? I think IT is more competitive than some parts of the business, so yes. But people are getting educated. Five years ago, few people knew about narcissism. Now there are online discussion groups which deal with the topic. And the dynamics of the workforce have changed so that narcissist personalities are standing out more.
Traits of the Narcissist
Some of the characteristics that identify narcissists:
They are successful and goal-oriented but show no empathy or concern for others.
They are charismatic, well spoken and funny.
They disrespect boundaries and others' privacy.
They patronize and criticize others.
They can be cruel and abusive toward peers, but charming in front of their managers.
They expect special treatment and privileges.
They are manipulative and pit co-workers against one another.
They abhor criticism or disagreement.
They are anxious or paranoid, reacting with rage when they can't control a situation or their behaviors are exposed.
What steps can IT managers take to address these issues? You need a health care professional, like a psychologist who specializes in employee counseling services, to get involved. Managers need to document behaviors and not be afraid to go to HR and say, "This is what I'm seeing and what people are telling me."
Once narcissistic employees are identified, how do you deal with them? HR should encourage them to use an employee-referral service such as counseling. Some narcissists, when confronted, can see how their behavior is impacting staff and their own performance. If they can't, HR has to calmly play back what they did. And you must establish firm boundaries, with timely, progressive consequences. You need to follow up to see if behaviors are improving or getting worse. But people's behavior patterns typically don't change unless they get help or become enlightened. And once a narcissist's behaviors are observed and documented, they can become even more cruel and offensive, since they no longer can hide their behaviors and rationalize them away.
Susan again: If you are surrounded by selfish people like I used to be, start asking God to surround you at work and at home with only people who are as unselfish. loving and giving as you are. I did this, and within a year, my life and the people around me had totally changed. If I did this, you can do it too ;-)
Inspiration: this is my husbands' and my personal saying: It's never too late to start a great tommorrow!
Career Watch: Dealing with 'It's All About Me' syndrome
August 4, 2008 (Computerworld) This feature originally appeared in Computerworld's print edition. The 'It's All About Me' Syndrome
Five years ago, Jean Ritala had never heard the term narcissism. Then someone described her as having been "stung by a narcissist" and shared books and Web sites with her on the topic. Now, besides being the IT support services manager at Mystic Lake Casino Hotel in Prior Lake, Minn., Ritala educates and coaches others on how to deal with narcissists.
Narcissists show a pervasive need for attention and admiration and a lack of concern for others. But are they dangerous in the workplace?
"The cost to organizations from narcissism in the workplace is staggering," as the narcissist's co-workers become ill with stress, teamwork deteriorates, projects fail and turnover rises, says Ritala.
"Up to one-third of a narcissist's victims in the workplace will quit the company or transfer to another department if nothing is done" to address the behavior, she says.
Once she had become educated on the topic of narcissism, Ritala began to recognize narcissistic traits in the workplace. Feeling that it is a problem that is pervasive but too often ignored, she and management consultant Gerald Falkowski wrote a booklet on the topic, called Narcissism in the Workplace (Red Swan Publishing USA, 2007).
Ritala, former president of the IT Service Management Forum - U.S., spoke recently with Computerworld about dealing with narcissism in IT organizations.
Is narcissism prevalent within IT organizations? I think IT is more competitive than some parts of the business, so yes. But people are getting educated. Five years ago, few people knew about narcissism. Now there are online discussion groups which deal with the topic. And the dynamics of the workforce have changed so that narcissist personalities are standing out more.
Traits of the Narcissist
Some of the characteristics that identify narcissists:
They are successful and goal-oriented but show no empathy or concern for others.
They are charismatic, well spoken and funny.
They disrespect boundaries and others' privacy.
They patronize and criticize others.
They can be cruel and abusive toward peers, but charming in front of their managers.
They expect special treatment and privileges.
They are manipulative and pit co-workers against one another.
They abhor criticism or disagreement.
They are anxious or paranoid, reacting with rage when they can't control a situation or their behaviors are exposed.
What steps can IT managers take to address these issues? You need a health care professional, like a psychologist who specializes in employee counseling services, to get involved. Managers need to document behaviors and not be afraid to go to HR and say, "This is what I'm seeing and what people are telling me."
Once narcissistic employees are identified, how do you deal with them? HR should encourage them to use an employee-referral service such as counseling. Some narcissists, when confronted, can see how their behavior is impacting staff and their own performance. If they can't, HR has to calmly play back what they did. And you must establish firm boundaries, with timely, progressive consequences. You need to follow up to see if behaviors are improving or getting worse. But people's behavior patterns typically don't change unless they get help or become enlightened. And once a narcissist's behaviors are observed and documented, they can become even more cruel and offensive, since they no longer can hide their behaviors and rationalize them away.
Susan again: If you are surrounded by selfish people like I used to be, start asking God to surround you at work and at home with only people who are as unselfish. loving and giving as you are. I did this, and within a year, my life and the people around me had totally changed. If I did this, you can do it too ;-)
Inspiration: this is my husbands' and my personal saying: It's never too late to start a great tommorrow!
Wednesday, August 6, 2008
Stomach Ulcers
Do you have stomach ulcers or know of someone who does? You might want to try aloe vera. Read this story:
Rowena Tucker, 48, teacher, lactation consultant, retired Physicians Assistant
"About ten years ago, I had not one ulcer, but two. I had read Prevention magazine for about thirty years. That got me to reading other alternative medicine information. Somewhere in all of this information, I knew that aloe vera was used to cure stomach ulcers.
My mother had always kept aloe vera around when we were growing up to use for burns. So I knew from personal experience how powerful aloe could be as a healing agent.
I went to my local health food store and bought a jug. It was a jug in the shape of a maple syrup bottle. I don’t know if that’s what they have now or not. I remember it was the unadulterated type, 100% aloe vera. It was more of a gel than a liquid. I used to swallow about four glubs, once in the morning, once in the evening. I choked it down. It was not bitter, just different. I used up the bottle. This took about 2-3 weeks.
It cured my ulcers. They never returned, even though I continued, off and on, to have digestive problems.
It wasn’t until about five years later that I recognized that I had the symptoms of celiac disease. I got my doctor to order the test for celiac disease, and this test confirmed it. Now I just leave all gluten out of my diet and I have no digestive problems. Of course, leaving all gluten out of your diet, isn’t as easy as it sounds, but you get used to it."
Rowena Tucker, 48, teacher, lactation consultant, retired Physicians Assistant
"About ten years ago, I had not one ulcer, but two. I had read Prevention magazine for about thirty years. That got me to reading other alternative medicine information. Somewhere in all of this information, I knew that aloe vera was used to cure stomach ulcers.
My mother had always kept aloe vera around when we were growing up to use for burns. So I knew from personal experience how powerful aloe could be as a healing agent.
I went to my local health food store and bought a jug. It was a jug in the shape of a maple syrup bottle. I don’t know if that’s what they have now or not. I remember it was the unadulterated type, 100% aloe vera. It was more of a gel than a liquid. I used to swallow about four glubs, once in the morning, once in the evening. I choked it down. It was not bitter, just different. I used up the bottle. This took about 2-3 weeks.
It cured my ulcers. They never returned, even though I continued, off and on, to have digestive problems.
It wasn’t until about five years later that I recognized that I had the symptoms of celiac disease. I got my doctor to order the test for celiac disease, and this test confirmed it. Now I just leave all gluten out of my diet and I have no digestive problems. Of course, leaving all gluten out of your diet, isn’t as easy as it sounds, but you get used to it."
Tuesday, August 5, 2008
Gaurdasil
Should young girls get the gaurdasil vaccine or not? I have recently been asked that.
All the marketing done on tv and to medical doctors says, of course, yes. This is a counter argument, and it is the best, most thorough I have found. One of the best arguments I have found in the article is that since it is men who are passing around the HPV virus, why aren't men getting inoculated as well, or instead of? The second argument is that there are several HPV viruses, each varying in carcinogenic capability, and, according to this article, the vaccine doesn't even protect against 16 of them. (see paragraph 11 and 12). The third argument that made me think, was in paragraph13, that the Centers for Disease Control claim most women clear most of the HPV strains on their own, with no symptoms. Fourth, paragraphs 15, 16, and 17: with annual pap smears, all cervical cancer should be 100% curable, and this is according to the Natinal Cancer Institute website. The author adds that annual pap smears are much more inexpensive than the vaccine.
The vaccine has only been out two years, and the authors question the long term side effects.
I got this from http://www.hpvtruth.org. Here is the article for you to read:
Gardasil Risks, Questions
A synopsis of the book “On Guard: Garadasil” by Dr Ralph W Moss
Recently, in America, certain political figures have unilaterally decided to instigate legislation making it mandatory for all 11-12 year old school girls in the State of Texas, to be vaccinated with Gardasil, which has been created by Merck Inc. to protect against cervical cancer, but which only covers 4 out of the 20 or so strains of the human papillomavirus (HPV) – i.e. types 6,11, 16 & 18 – known to cause cervical cancer. Now, 31 other USA States are also debating the introduction of similar Bills, mandating Gardasil vaccination to young girls – in the US this would mean around 150 million people.
On the surface – despite the dictatorial aspects of this decision – it may seem that this would be a good thing; i.e. doing something pro-actively to minimize the death in women from cervical cancer. However, scratch the surface of this recent political intervention into a medical arena and one realizes that there is more behind this new and apparently humanitarian driven incentive, than the desire to prevent unnecessary deaths among women.
Let’s explore this situation a bit more closely. The viruses capable of causing cervical cancer are ubiquitous in our Western culture and can only be transmitted through direct sexual contact. Most people exposed to this style of virus are able to clear it from their system rather easily, providing them with immunity and no further problems
The next important factor is that where the virus is not cleared by the body, it usually causes a slow disease process, which is easy enough to find and monitor using present medical techniques, such as the PAP Smear. If this is done on a regular and persistent basis, no one needs to die of this form of cancer.
Dr. Moss argues that there are sufficient unknowns about this vaccine, which alone should alert us to being cautious about jumping onto the bandwagon too rapidly. And these points are discussed below. However, some of the other reasons being presented by medicine, as to why this vaccine should be embraced by the community, don’t fully stack up either. Let’s look at some of these issues.
The main reason authorities want to inoculate such a large proportion of the population is because they believe that if sufficient numbers are “protected,” then the disease organism being vaccinated against has less chance of actually causing infection in that population. This creates what scientists call, “herd immunity.” But for this strategy to work effectively, it also becomes vital that the entire at-risk population maintains a high degree of on-going immunity via vaccination. And there are a few serious flaws with this model of disease prevention, because for this concept of “herd immunity” to work, it is crucial that the entire male population be inoculated too, as they constitute the primary reservoir of infection, from which women can continuously become re-infected. Indeed, if this is so, why are young boys and all males not being targeted for vaccination too? Why is it that yet again – as with contraception – it’s women who are forced to bear the brunt of it all?
But it gets even more bizarre! One could – at a stretch of the imagination – argue that this principle might work, if every sexually active person - both male and female – were to be vaccinated, as well as guaranteed to strictly maintain their vaccination status every so many years. However, what about all the millions of tourists which enter into the States (or Australia – because what is being written about here equally applies to us) every year?
Every single one of them would have to be vaccinated – and this would have to be organized well in advance to such a visit, to ensure the vaccine had already “taken.” And what about the 11-12 million illegal immigrants entering the States? Such a goal therefore of “herd immunity,” can be seen to be an impossibility, despite intensive efforts and costing billions of dollars.
Government knows that this concept cannot work, yet it maintains its stance on mandatory vaccination for all young school girls. Is there another reason driving this seemingly valid desire to eliminate a real and potentially dangerous cancer?
Let’s also look at some interesting statistics. As Ralph Moss states in his eBook “On Guard – Gardasil,” P.5, “….a 2007 study from the CDC in the USA shows that 1 in 4 US women aged 14 to 59 are infected with some form of the papillomavirus.” It seems that as many as 80% of women are infected with a strain of this virus by the time they reach 50, but the crucial point to understand is that only 3.4 % of these women are actually living with a strain of this virus i.e. type 6, 11, 16 or 18, most capable of causing cancer and covered by the Gardasil Vaccine.
The majority of strains found in women is non-cancer causing and out of the 20 or so strains capable of causing cancer, it is crucial to understand that Gardasil only protects against 4 of these! So out of the 80% of women infected with papillomavirus, only 3.4% would be covered by the Vaccine. This vaccine doesn’t protect against strains 31, 32 or 45, nor against at least another 9 others which are known to be strongly associated with cervical cancer.
So let’s state this again as clearly as possible: according to the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) the reality is that although almost 80% of women in the States will be infected with some strain of the human papillomavirus by the time they are 50 years old, the great majority are by harmless strains, incapable of causing cancer. Then, out of the 20 or so strains actually capable of causing cancer, stains 6, 11, 16 & 18 (the only four prevented by Gardasil), were found in a scant 3.4% of this population of women. And the two most carcinogenic strains – 16 & 18 – were found in only 1.6% of this study group of women.
Let’s repeat again, Gardasil does not protect against the other 16 strains known to cause cervical cancer.
Another point that bears repeating is the low virulence of these viruses, in most cases. As Ralph Moss states: (“On Guard – Gardasil,” P.6) “…while human papiloma virus is certainly widespread in the population, the vast majority of people who contract it, to quote the Centers for Disease Control, 'will not have any symptoms and will clear the infection on their own.'“
So why the mandatory vaccination of all school girls, for an infection which almost always clears up on its own and generally causes no health problems? Especially when a far cheaper approach of regular PAP Smears is more than capable of picking up any early cervical changes caused by this virus, which are then very treatable, thus preventing any progression towards cancer?
The PAP Smear test is also capable of finding HPV in the sample of tissue scraped off the cervix, thus alerting the patient and their doctor for more pro-actively intensive testing and monitoring, even if there are as yet no cervical changes found via the test. Indeed, the PAP Smear test has been a major factor allowing cervical cancer incidence to decrease by 80% in the USA over the last decades.
Cervical cancer is usually very slow to progress (it may take decades for most women with HPV to develop any frank cancer). Regular PAP Smear monitoring – plus some naturopathic intervention, especially the regular use of such vitamins as folic acid; B12; Vit. A; CoQ10 and Kelp – amongst others – are more than capable of observing these changes before they become a health problem as well as enormously minimizing the initiation of cervical changes through the use of such nutrients.
Again, as Dr. Moss states (“On Guard – Gardasil,” P.7), “….According to the US National Library of Medicine's Health Services/Technology Assessment text: 'Generally, the progression to invasive cancer follows a slow, predictable pattern…30 – 70% of untreated patients with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) will develop invasive carcinoma in 10-12 years.'”
In other words, as Dr. Moss states:- (“On Guard – Gardasil,” P.7), “...The US National Cancer Institute website (www.cancer.gov) states: “Properly treated, tumor control of in situ cervical carcinoma should be nearly 100 percent...In other words, there are few things in oncology as certain as the cure of premalignant changes in the cervix!” Wish that other cancers were so predictably curable!
PAP Smears have a very low rate of false negatives, so it is most unlikely that cancerous changes wouldn’t be found where a woman is having regular testing done. There is a very small percentage of woman where the cervical lesion is found to be more aggressive and rapid in onset, but even here treatment inevitably is very successful.
All this is quite contrary to Merck’s P.R. program, which tends to insinuate that HPV is a major and urgent health crisis in the States (& therefore in Australia), for which they have now created a very successful answer. But that is in fact far from the truth and hardly a basis from which to then demand the mandatory vaccination of entire populations (in the USA).
As Dr. Moss states: (“On Guard – Gardasil” P.28 “...Merck knows how to play this game [of disease mongering] skillfully, and fear is its foremost weapon. The New York Times quoted Margaret McGlynn, Merck’s president for vaccines, as saying: 'Each and every day that a female delays getting the vaccine there is a chance she is exposed to human papillomavirus.'” (Saul. 2007)
On one level that is indeed true, but in reality this is nothing but an hysterical approach, aimed at scaring people onto the vaccine. It must be emphasized yet again that all of us are exposed to about 100 forms of HPV from birth onwards and it is estimated that 80% of women (if not men) have been able to generate their own natural immunity to these viruses, allowing it to be cleared of its own accord and giving us natural immunity for the future.
As Dr. Moss states:((“On Guard – Gardasil” P.28) “...Thus to say that each and every day that you delay getting Gardasil you are putting yourself at risk is scientific gobblygook.”
Along with the frequent and regular use of the PAP Smear, the regular and consistent use of condoms for any sexual activity outside of a monogamous relationship, has also been proven via a study, to further decrease the risk of contracting the HPV virus by 70%.
Another way women can minimize cervical cancer is to look at a range of lifestyle issues:
Stop smoking! A Utah study showed smokers have a 3.42 times greater chance of developing cervical cancer. This applies to those exposed to passive smoking too.
Diet is definitely known to have protective advantages, with studies showing that those eating a diet high in vegetables had at least a 50 % smaller chance of developing cervical cancer. Lycopene was identified as one major nutrient capable of this sort of protection. Clinical evidence also shows that cervical changes can be reversed by some of the nutrients mentioned earlier in this article.
Maintaining a healthy immune system – again via diet, exercise, lifestyle factors and the use of various nutrients and herbs – favors less likelihood of developing abnormal cell formation on the cervix. HIV; chronic use of cortisone, alcohol abuse or frequent use of recreational drugs are known to have negative impacts on immune function.
While it is true that nothing in life is absolutely certain, nevertheless by incorporating some of the suggestions above into one’s lifestyle, the chances of developing cervical cancer – even if you do get infected by the HPV virus – is hugely reduced. And as mentioned earlier, even if cancerous changes do occur and are found by regular PAP Smears, then treatment of such changes is virtually guaranteed to prevent the cancer progressing any further. Especially if a complementary naturopathic approach is also included in the overall treatment plan.
These simple yet effective alternate approaches to cervical cancer surely preclude the need to now go and vaccinate entire populations of young women, when indeed we don’t even know the long-term effects of such vaccines either. We are assured by science that these vaccines are entirely safe, yet caution should also remind us that we were similarly assured regarding the safety of DDT; asbestos; lead in petrol; smoking, HRT; Vioxx and hot off the ranks, now Stilnox…and the list goes on.
Keep in mind that it was Merck (the makers of Gardasil!) who manufactured Vioxx and as per the FDA's own conclusions, it’s estimated that Vioxx killed 27,785 people via heart attacks and sudden cardiac death, between 1999 & 2003.
Historically, we do know for sure how the FDA also got it very wrong about another vaccine called “RotaShield,” again made by Merck! This vaccine, originally deemed safe by the FDA, was later found to increase the incidence of a type of bowel obstruction in vaccinated infants. A subsequent variation-on-a-theme vaccine called RotaTeq – again claimed to be safe by the FDA and approved for sale – was later found to also increase the exact same style of bowel obstruction in vaccinated infants.
It does highlight the potential dangers of deciding to willy-nilly mandate compulsory vaccination in a huge portion of a population, when the vaccine has only just been released and so much about its potential for side-effects simply isn’t known yet. Surely prudence would suggest that if any compulsory vaccination program were to be instigated, that this should only be done after sufficient years of clinical experience with this vaccine, within the general community has accrued? These points however, also relate to whether individual women or girls should be jumping for this vaccine too quickly!
A further complication in the claims being made for the effectiveness of this vaccine, is the reality that in both treated and placebo groups, no incidence of cervical cancer were found. Not surprising, as the trial was over such a relatively short period of time – maximum 4 years – and as cervical cancer is such a slowly developing condition, this is not unexpected.
However, it is the flow-on from this reality and how Merck then interpreted the results that is of concern. As Dr. Moss states: “...Approval was given based on an extrapolation from conditions known only to be associated with an increased risk of cervical cancer...It is believed that prevention of cervical precancerous lesions is highly likely to result in the prevention of those cancers.” (FDA 2006 – emphasis added). So are we now mandating vaccines for half the population based on an unproven premise that is “believed” to be “highly likely?” (“On Guard – Gardasil,” P.18) How scientific is that?
Trial results also strongly indicated that “...Gardasil has not been shown to protect against the [already present] diseases caused by all HPV types and will not treat existing disease caused by the HPV types contained in the vaccine.” (“On Guard – Gardasil,” P.19 – emphasis added). In other words, if you are already infected with HPV, then the vaccine is of no use and having yourself inoculated only opens you up to all the unknowns and concerns about this vaccine, with none of the purported benefits.
Merck however will argue that Gardasil does more than prevent cervical cancer. It supposedly also prevents genital warts – another form of venereal disease. Here again, although genital warts are no fun, they are hardly life-threatening and more often than not resolve spontaneously – especially when certain naturopathic interventions are utilized. There are also a range of medical interventions which have been shown to provide a relatively good resolution to this problem.
Yet, just because a vaccine can protect against such a venereal disease, is it not better to then offer this vaccine selectively to highly sexually active people, rather than inoculate entire populations of people? Particularly when US politicians now seem to want to make such vaccines mandatory?
Dr. Moss also expresses hesitation about some of the safety issues around the use of Gardasil. The long-term consequences simply aren’t known – follow-up of trial participants were only over 18 months to 4 years. When contemplating the mandatory mass inoculation of young women, such a time span hardly gets most of these “guinea-pigs” into their early twenties and leaves a lot of life-years ahead for which there simply is no safely data. But we do already know that vaccinations of any kind are a very controversial issue, with much data accumulating, strongly suggesting that any vaccines can have distinctly negative consequences on our health.
Indeed, when one looks at the trial data, there was a small but distinct increase in a range of arthritis – from juvenile to rheumatoid to osteo to reactive arthritis – in the Gardasil group compared to the placebo group. And juvenile rheumatoid arthritis can be a totally debilitating disease,capable of not just maiming, but slowly killing its victims.
The other troublesome point is that there is no data available to definitely guarantee that the vaccine has durability beyond 5 years. We do know that other vaccines “run out” after time and need to be repeated. Tetanus vaccines are but one example. This may equally be so for Gardasil – we simply don’t know yet. In turn such repeated vaccinations mean extra cost as well as the potential for extra side-effects. Hence, beyond 5 years, people already vaccinated will have to do regular blood tests to determine their vaccination status. More costs.
Another issue not made clear by Merck is that although there were 20,000 young women used in the trials, less than 1,200 were under 16 years of age and even fewer were at the age of puberty, which is the target age for the mandatory vaccination program in the USA and the primary target age for vaccination in Australia. So we are left with a situation where the very people chosen for vaccination, are also the very group about which Merck has the least amount of data via the clinical trials!
The bottom line is that the entire situation surrounding the use of Gardasil, is filled with a lot of “ifs” and “buts.” Certainly not enough of a crystal clear basis from which to be mandating for compulsory vaccination of all young school girls - (in the US). And at an economic cost of between US$450 – 550 for the three necessary vaccinations (in the US), multiplied by millions of people proposed to be the compulsory target of this vaccine, (in the US the cost is estimated to be about $1 billion – repeated each year for the next batch of young school children!) one can hardly be blamed for being even a bit cynical as to what is truly driving this sudden urge to vaccinate large portions of the population.
Indeed, Wall Street analysts have already projected Gardasil sales at US$4 billion annually!
Such cynicism is especially valid when the scientific reality is that this vaccine can’t fully protect against the development of cervical cancer, due to it only covering 4 out of the potential 20 or so stains known to cause cancer. Let alone unanswered questions about long-term safety.
Dr. Moss has indicated in his eBook that to protect a woman from adolescence to later in life, with the high probability that the vaccine will require boosters, and then working out the cost of saving just one life, the figure comes out to be about US$1,946,280 per person — almost 2 million dollars i.e. projected costs will be about US$2 million for saving just one life from cervical cancer!
Indeed, what price life? But surely a much more economic — and already long proven — solution to the problem of preventing cervical cancer, would be to use such proposed funds towards the dramatically lower costing it would take to provide regular, free PAP Smears to all woman, from early on.
Now it is up to you to decide whether you still wish you — or your children — to be exposed to yet another of Merck’s potential “health time-bombs.” Now you also know that there are other, proven alternatives to preventing cervical cancer, at far less cost and far less potential for known — and as yet unknown — side-effect risks.
All the marketing done on tv and to medical doctors says, of course, yes. This is a counter argument, and it is the best, most thorough I have found. One of the best arguments I have found in the article is that since it is men who are passing around the HPV virus, why aren't men getting inoculated as well, or instead of? The second argument is that there are several HPV viruses, each varying in carcinogenic capability, and, according to this article, the vaccine doesn't even protect against 16 of them. (see paragraph 11 and 12). The third argument that made me think, was in paragraph13, that the Centers for Disease Control claim most women clear most of the HPV strains on their own, with no symptoms. Fourth, paragraphs 15, 16, and 17: with annual pap smears, all cervical cancer should be 100% curable, and this is according to the Natinal Cancer Institute website. The author adds that annual pap smears are much more inexpensive than the vaccine.
The vaccine has only been out two years, and the authors question the long term side effects.
I got this from http://www.hpvtruth.org. Here is the article for you to read:
Gardasil Risks, Questions
A synopsis of the book “On Guard: Garadasil” by Dr Ralph W Moss
Recently, in America, certain political figures have unilaterally decided to instigate legislation making it mandatory for all 11-12 year old school girls in the State of Texas, to be vaccinated with Gardasil, which has been created by Merck Inc. to protect against cervical cancer, but which only covers 4 out of the 20 or so strains of the human papillomavirus (HPV) – i.e. types 6,11, 16 & 18 – known to cause cervical cancer. Now, 31 other USA States are also debating the introduction of similar Bills, mandating Gardasil vaccination to young girls – in the US this would mean around 150 million people.
On the surface – despite the dictatorial aspects of this decision – it may seem that this would be a good thing; i.e. doing something pro-actively to minimize the death in women from cervical cancer. However, scratch the surface of this recent political intervention into a medical arena and one realizes that there is more behind this new and apparently humanitarian driven incentive, than the desire to prevent unnecessary deaths among women.
Let’s explore this situation a bit more closely. The viruses capable of causing cervical cancer are ubiquitous in our Western culture and can only be transmitted through direct sexual contact. Most people exposed to this style of virus are able to clear it from their system rather easily, providing them with immunity and no further problems
The next important factor is that where the virus is not cleared by the body, it usually causes a slow disease process, which is easy enough to find and monitor using present medical techniques, such as the PAP Smear. If this is done on a regular and persistent basis, no one needs to die of this form of cancer.
Dr. Moss argues that there are sufficient unknowns about this vaccine, which alone should alert us to being cautious about jumping onto the bandwagon too rapidly. And these points are discussed below. However, some of the other reasons being presented by medicine, as to why this vaccine should be embraced by the community, don’t fully stack up either. Let’s look at some of these issues.
The main reason authorities want to inoculate such a large proportion of the population is because they believe that if sufficient numbers are “protected,” then the disease organism being vaccinated against has less chance of actually causing infection in that population. This creates what scientists call, “herd immunity.” But for this strategy to work effectively, it also becomes vital that the entire at-risk population maintains a high degree of on-going immunity via vaccination. And there are a few serious flaws with this model of disease prevention, because for this concept of “herd immunity” to work, it is crucial that the entire male population be inoculated too, as they constitute the primary reservoir of infection, from which women can continuously become re-infected. Indeed, if this is so, why are young boys and all males not being targeted for vaccination too? Why is it that yet again – as with contraception – it’s women who are forced to bear the brunt of it all?
But it gets even more bizarre! One could – at a stretch of the imagination – argue that this principle might work, if every sexually active person - both male and female – were to be vaccinated, as well as guaranteed to strictly maintain their vaccination status every so many years. However, what about all the millions of tourists which enter into the States (or Australia – because what is being written about here equally applies to us) every year?
Every single one of them would have to be vaccinated – and this would have to be organized well in advance to such a visit, to ensure the vaccine had already “taken.” And what about the 11-12 million illegal immigrants entering the States? Such a goal therefore of “herd immunity,” can be seen to be an impossibility, despite intensive efforts and costing billions of dollars.
Government knows that this concept cannot work, yet it maintains its stance on mandatory vaccination for all young school girls. Is there another reason driving this seemingly valid desire to eliminate a real and potentially dangerous cancer?
Let’s also look at some interesting statistics. As Ralph Moss states in his eBook “On Guard – Gardasil,” P.5, “….a 2007 study from the CDC in the USA shows that 1 in 4 US women aged 14 to 59 are infected with some form of the papillomavirus.” It seems that as many as 80% of women are infected with a strain of this virus by the time they reach 50, but the crucial point to understand is that only 3.4 % of these women are actually living with a strain of this virus i.e. type 6, 11, 16 or 18, most capable of causing cancer and covered by the Gardasil Vaccine.
The majority of strains found in women is non-cancer causing and out of the 20 or so strains capable of causing cancer, it is crucial to understand that Gardasil only protects against 4 of these! So out of the 80% of women infected with papillomavirus, only 3.4% would be covered by the Vaccine. This vaccine doesn’t protect against strains 31, 32 or 45, nor against at least another 9 others which are known to be strongly associated with cervical cancer.
So let’s state this again as clearly as possible: according to the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) the reality is that although almost 80% of women in the States will be infected with some strain of the human papillomavirus by the time they are 50 years old, the great majority are by harmless strains, incapable of causing cancer. Then, out of the 20 or so strains actually capable of causing cancer, stains 6, 11, 16 & 18 (the only four prevented by Gardasil), were found in a scant 3.4% of this population of women. And the two most carcinogenic strains – 16 & 18 – were found in only 1.6% of this study group of women.
Let’s repeat again, Gardasil does not protect against the other 16 strains known to cause cervical cancer.
Another point that bears repeating is the low virulence of these viruses, in most cases. As Ralph Moss states: (“On Guard – Gardasil,” P.6) “…while human papiloma virus is certainly widespread in the population, the vast majority of people who contract it, to quote the Centers for Disease Control, 'will not have any symptoms and will clear the infection on their own.'“
So why the mandatory vaccination of all school girls, for an infection which almost always clears up on its own and generally causes no health problems? Especially when a far cheaper approach of regular PAP Smears is more than capable of picking up any early cervical changes caused by this virus, which are then very treatable, thus preventing any progression towards cancer?
The PAP Smear test is also capable of finding HPV in the sample of tissue scraped off the cervix, thus alerting the patient and their doctor for more pro-actively intensive testing and monitoring, even if there are as yet no cervical changes found via the test. Indeed, the PAP Smear test has been a major factor allowing cervical cancer incidence to decrease by 80% in the USA over the last decades.
Cervical cancer is usually very slow to progress (it may take decades for most women with HPV to develop any frank cancer). Regular PAP Smear monitoring – plus some naturopathic intervention, especially the regular use of such vitamins as folic acid; B12; Vit. A; CoQ10 and Kelp – amongst others – are more than capable of observing these changes before they become a health problem as well as enormously minimizing the initiation of cervical changes through the use of such nutrients.
Again, as Dr. Moss states (“On Guard – Gardasil,” P.7), “….According to the US National Library of Medicine's Health Services/Technology Assessment text: 'Generally, the progression to invasive cancer follows a slow, predictable pattern…30 – 70% of untreated patients with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) will develop invasive carcinoma in 10-12 years.'”
In other words, as Dr. Moss states:- (“On Guard – Gardasil,” P.7), “...The US National Cancer Institute website (www.cancer.gov) states: “Properly treated, tumor control of in situ cervical carcinoma should be nearly 100 percent...In other words, there are few things in oncology as certain as the cure of premalignant changes in the cervix!” Wish that other cancers were so predictably curable!
PAP Smears have a very low rate of false negatives, so it is most unlikely that cancerous changes wouldn’t be found where a woman is having regular testing done. There is a very small percentage of woman where the cervical lesion is found to be more aggressive and rapid in onset, but even here treatment inevitably is very successful.
All this is quite contrary to Merck’s P.R. program, which tends to insinuate that HPV is a major and urgent health crisis in the States (& therefore in Australia), for which they have now created a very successful answer. But that is in fact far from the truth and hardly a basis from which to then demand the mandatory vaccination of entire populations (in the USA).
As Dr. Moss states: (“On Guard – Gardasil” P.28 “...Merck knows how to play this game [of disease mongering] skillfully, and fear is its foremost weapon. The New York Times quoted Margaret McGlynn, Merck’s president for vaccines, as saying: 'Each and every day that a female delays getting the vaccine there is a chance she is exposed to human papillomavirus.'” (Saul. 2007)
On one level that is indeed true, but in reality this is nothing but an hysterical approach, aimed at scaring people onto the vaccine. It must be emphasized yet again that all of us are exposed to about 100 forms of HPV from birth onwards and it is estimated that 80% of women (if not men) have been able to generate their own natural immunity to these viruses, allowing it to be cleared of its own accord and giving us natural immunity for the future.
As Dr. Moss states:((“On Guard – Gardasil” P.28) “...Thus to say that each and every day that you delay getting Gardasil you are putting yourself at risk is scientific gobblygook.”
Along with the frequent and regular use of the PAP Smear, the regular and consistent use of condoms for any sexual activity outside of a monogamous relationship, has also been proven via a study, to further decrease the risk of contracting the HPV virus by 70%.
Another way women can minimize cervical cancer is to look at a range of lifestyle issues:
Stop smoking! A Utah study showed smokers have a 3.42 times greater chance of developing cervical cancer. This applies to those exposed to passive smoking too.
Diet is definitely known to have protective advantages, with studies showing that those eating a diet high in vegetables had at least a 50 % smaller chance of developing cervical cancer. Lycopene was identified as one major nutrient capable of this sort of protection. Clinical evidence also shows that cervical changes can be reversed by some of the nutrients mentioned earlier in this article.
Maintaining a healthy immune system – again via diet, exercise, lifestyle factors and the use of various nutrients and herbs – favors less likelihood of developing abnormal cell formation on the cervix. HIV; chronic use of cortisone, alcohol abuse or frequent use of recreational drugs are known to have negative impacts on immune function.
While it is true that nothing in life is absolutely certain, nevertheless by incorporating some of the suggestions above into one’s lifestyle, the chances of developing cervical cancer – even if you do get infected by the HPV virus – is hugely reduced. And as mentioned earlier, even if cancerous changes do occur and are found by regular PAP Smears, then treatment of such changes is virtually guaranteed to prevent the cancer progressing any further. Especially if a complementary naturopathic approach is also included in the overall treatment plan.
These simple yet effective alternate approaches to cervical cancer surely preclude the need to now go and vaccinate entire populations of young women, when indeed we don’t even know the long-term effects of such vaccines either. We are assured by science that these vaccines are entirely safe, yet caution should also remind us that we were similarly assured regarding the safety of DDT; asbestos; lead in petrol; smoking, HRT; Vioxx and hot off the ranks, now Stilnox…and the list goes on.
Keep in mind that it was Merck (the makers of Gardasil!) who manufactured Vioxx and as per the FDA's own conclusions, it’s estimated that Vioxx killed 27,785 people via heart attacks and sudden cardiac death, between 1999 & 2003.
Historically, we do know for sure how the FDA also got it very wrong about another vaccine called “RotaShield,” again made by Merck! This vaccine, originally deemed safe by the FDA, was later found to increase the incidence of a type of bowel obstruction in vaccinated infants. A subsequent variation-on-a-theme vaccine called RotaTeq – again claimed to be safe by the FDA and approved for sale – was later found to also increase the exact same style of bowel obstruction in vaccinated infants.
It does highlight the potential dangers of deciding to willy-nilly mandate compulsory vaccination in a huge portion of a population, when the vaccine has only just been released and so much about its potential for side-effects simply isn’t known yet. Surely prudence would suggest that if any compulsory vaccination program were to be instigated, that this should only be done after sufficient years of clinical experience with this vaccine, within the general community has accrued? These points however, also relate to whether individual women or girls should be jumping for this vaccine too quickly!
A further complication in the claims being made for the effectiveness of this vaccine, is the reality that in both treated and placebo groups, no incidence of cervical cancer were found. Not surprising, as the trial was over such a relatively short period of time – maximum 4 years – and as cervical cancer is such a slowly developing condition, this is not unexpected.
However, it is the flow-on from this reality and how Merck then interpreted the results that is of concern. As Dr. Moss states: “...Approval was given based on an extrapolation from conditions known only to be associated with an increased risk of cervical cancer...It is believed that prevention of cervical precancerous lesions is highly likely to result in the prevention of those cancers.” (FDA 2006 – emphasis added). So are we now mandating vaccines for half the population based on an unproven premise that is “believed” to be “highly likely?” (“On Guard – Gardasil,” P.18) How scientific is that?
Trial results also strongly indicated that “...Gardasil has not been shown to protect against the [already present] diseases caused by all HPV types and will not treat existing disease caused by the HPV types contained in the vaccine.” (“On Guard – Gardasil,” P.19 – emphasis added). In other words, if you are already infected with HPV, then the vaccine is of no use and having yourself inoculated only opens you up to all the unknowns and concerns about this vaccine, with none of the purported benefits.
Merck however will argue that Gardasil does more than prevent cervical cancer. It supposedly also prevents genital warts – another form of venereal disease. Here again, although genital warts are no fun, they are hardly life-threatening and more often than not resolve spontaneously – especially when certain naturopathic interventions are utilized. There are also a range of medical interventions which have been shown to provide a relatively good resolution to this problem.
Yet, just because a vaccine can protect against such a venereal disease, is it not better to then offer this vaccine selectively to highly sexually active people, rather than inoculate entire populations of people? Particularly when US politicians now seem to want to make such vaccines mandatory?
Dr. Moss also expresses hesitation about some of the safety issues around the use of Gardasil. The long-term consequences simply aren’t known – follow-up of trial participants were only over 18 months to 4 years. When contemplating the mandatory mass inoculation of young women, such a time span hardly gets most of these “guinea-pigs” into their early twenties and leaves a lot of life-years ahead for which there simply is no safely data. But we do already know that vaccinations of any kind are a very controversial issue, with much data accumulating, strongly suggesting that any vaccines can have distinctly negative consequences on our health.
Indeed, when one looks at the trial data, there was a small but distinct increase in a range of arthritis – from juvenile to rheumatoid to osteo to reactive arthritis – in the Gardasil group compared to the placebo group. And juvenile rheumatoid arthritis can be a totally debilitating disease,capable of not just maiming, but slowly killing its victims.
The other troublesome point is that there is no data available to definitely guarantee that the vaccine has durability beyond 5 years. We do know that other vaccines “run out” after time and need to be repeated. Tetanus vaccines are but one example. This may equally be so for Gardasil – we simply don’t know yet. In turn such repeated vaccinations mean extra cost as well as the potential for extra side-effects. Hence, beyond 5 years, people already vaccinated will have to do regular blood tests to determine their vaccination status. More costs.
Another issue not made clear by Merck is that although there were 20,000 young women used in the trials, less than 1,200 were under 16 years of age and even fewer were at the age of puberty, which is the target age for the mandatory vaccination program in the USA and the primary target age for vaccination in Australia. So we are left with a situation where the very people chosen for vaccination, are also the very group about which Merck has the least amount of data via the clinical trials!
The bottom line is that the entire situation surrounding the use of Gardasil, is filled with a lot of “ifs” and “buts.” Certainly not enough of a crystal clear basis from which to be mandating for compulsory vaccination of all young school girls - (in the US). And at an economic cost of between US$450 – 550 for the three necessary vaccinations (in the US), multiplied by millions of people proposed to be the compulsory target of this vaccine, (in the US the cost is estimated to be about $1 billion – repeated each year for the next batch of young school children!) one can hardly be blamed for being even a bit cynical as to what is truly driving this sudden urge to vaccinate large portions of the population.
Indeed, Wall Street analysts have already projected Gardasil sales at US$4 billion annually!
Such cynicism is especially valid when the scientific reality is that this vaccine can’t fully protect against the development of cervical cancer, due to it only covering 4 out of the potential 20 or so stains known to cause cancer. Let alone unanswered questions about long-term safety.
Dr. Moss has indicated in his eBook that to protect a woman from adolescence to later in life, with the high probability that the vaccine will require boosters, and then working out the cost of saving just one life, the figure comes out to be about US$1,946,280 per person — almost 2 million dollars i.e. projected costs will be about US$2 million for saving just one life from cervical cancer!
Indeed, what price life? But surely a much more economic — and already long proven — solution to the problem of preventing cervical cancer, would be to use such proposed funds towards the dramatically lower costing it would take to provide regular, free PAP Smears to all woman, from early on.
Now it is up to you to decide whether you still wish you — or your children — to be exposed to yet another of Merck’s potential “health time-bombs.” Now you also know that there are other, proven alternatives to preventing cervical cancer, at far less cost and far less potential for known — and as yet unknown — side-effect risks.
Toxic Mineral Oil and Petroleum
After reading my last blgo about White Flower analgesic balm (and decongestant), you might have realized that several of the ingredients, like camphor and menthol, are the same as you will find in over the counter products you have used often from your pharmacy. Products such as Campho Phenique and Mentholatum. That's right. And they do work. Maybe they work as well for you, and maybe they don't, but, right now, that's not the point.
The point of this blog is to remind you that mineral oil (in Campho phenique) and pertroleum (in Mentholatum) are each byproducts of the petroleum industry. You know, like the gasoline you pump into your car, and the oil you lubricate the engine with! Mineral oil and petroleum are known CARCINOGENS.
I just took a test to be licensed as a massage therapist for the state of Texas. One of thequestions was "which oil should never be used on the human body?" the correct answer was mineral oil. On page 56, paragraph six, of my mainstay massage book from school, MASSAGE THERAPY by Susan Salvo, reads: " Avoild mineral oi8l because it is a known CARCINOGEN (substance that case cancer). Mineral oil, or liquid petroleum, is not miscible in the body oils and adds no nutritive value to the skin because it does not penetrate the skin. Often, mineral oils serve as the barrier that may clog the pores."
In other words, not only are these products introducing known carcinogen chemicals into your body, but by blocking your pores the active ingredients aren't able to penetrate the skin and work as well. Therefore, there is a good chance that White Flower will work more effectively than either Campho Phenique or Menthalatum.
Ms. Salvo continues in the same paragraph: "Most brands of body lotions and creams contain mineral oil because it is inexpensive and has an ifinite shelf life. Baby oils consist primarily of mineral oil." Great, just what your little baby needs, carcnogens!
Again, when it comes to carcinogens, think 'cumulative effect'. Over a lifetime, how many carcinogens are you absorbing not your body through all great smelling lotions you smear on to the gas you pump. Check for the active ingredients, not just in the stuff you smear on when sick like White Flower versus Campho Phenique or Menthalatum, but all those wonderful smelling lotions used after bathing, or after handwashing. Think about it. A little bit may not be much of a carcinogenic effect. But a lot probably would be. Your skin, remember, is your largest organ. And it absorbs so much, so well.
So just think about it. When you can, when you have the option, if the state of Texas doesn't want their massage therapists to ever use any ingredient with mineral oil or petrolatum because of carcinogens, why would you?
The point of this blog is to remind you that mineral oil (in Campho phenique) and pertroleum (in Mentholatum) are each byproducts of the petroleum industry. You know, like the gasoline you pump into your car, and the oil you lubricate the engine with! Mineral oil and petroleum are known CARCINOGENS.
I just took a test to be licensed as a massage therapist for the state of Texas. One of thequestions was "which oil should never be used on the human body?" the correct answer was mineral oil. On page 56, paragraph six, of my mainstay massage book from school, MASSAGE THERAPY by Susan Salvo, reads: " Avoild mineral oi8l because it is a known CARCINOGEN (substance that case cancer). Mineral oil, or liquid petroleum, is not miscible in the body oils and adds no nutritive value to the skin because it does not penetrate the skin. Often, mineral oils serve as the barrier that may clog the pores."
In other words, not only are these products introducing known carcinogen chemicals into your body, but by blocking your pores the active ingredients aren't able to penetrate the skin and work as well. Therefore, there is a good chance that White Flower will work more effectively than either Campho Phenique or Menthalatum.
Ms. Salvo continues in the same paragraph: "Most brands of body lotions and creams contain mineral oil because it is inexpensive and has an ifinite shelf life. Baby oils consist primarily of mineral oil." Great, just what your little baby needs, carcnogens!
Again, when it comes to carcinogens, think 'cumulative effect'. Over a lifetime, how many carcinogens are you absorbing not your body through all great smelling lotions you smear on to the gas you pump. Check for the active ingredients, not just in the stuff you smear on when sick like White Flower versus Campho Phenique or Menthalatum, but all those wonderful smelling lotions used after bathing, or after handwashing. Think about it. A little bit may not be much of a carcinogenic effect. But a lot probably would be. Your skin, remember, is your largest organ. And it absorbs so much, so well.
So just think about it. When you can, when you have the option, if the state of Texas doesn't want their massage therapists to ever use any ingredient with mineral oil or petrolatum because of carcinogens, why would you?
An Unbelievable Decongestant
White Flower "analgesic balm" is also an unbelievable decongestant. For me, with this cold, it has been working better than any decongestant or expectorant I have ever taken. And it does this without speeding up my heart like many decongestants, or making me drowsy and sleepy like many expectorants.
You can buy White Flower at your health food store. I tried attaching a picture to my blog so that you could know what you are looking for, but for some reason, blogger is cooperating with me today. It is a tiny box and often hard to find. Ask for it. Even new emplyees know where it is because it is asked for so much.
And White Flower is quite a bargain at $4.99 for .34 fluid ounces, when very little will last a while. For me, depending on how decongested I am, I have smeared the stuff on my upper chest (very decongested) , or put a few drops on my shirt (not so decongested).
White Flower is a blend of essential oils that work: 40% wintergreen, 15% menthol, 6% Camphor, with inactive ingredients listed as eucalyptus, lavender and peppermint. These may be inactive for pain but not for nasal and chest congestion. I know from past experiences that eucalyptus and peppermint are powerful decongestants and that lavender is a powerful antiviral, anti fungal, antibacterial agent. Somehow this whole combination works great, and is much cheaper than if you were to buy the essential oils individually, at about an average of $10 each, and combine them.
Within about five minutes of applying White Flower, I can breathe better and my nose starts running.(decongestant) Within about fifteen minutes. after blowing my nose a few times, I am breathing without hearing that rattle trap stuff going on in my chest (expectorant).
And quite frankly, those first days when I felt much worse, I even spread some on my cheek where my sinuses are, keeping my eyes closed for about fifteen minutes. It does but the eyes a bit, but oh my, the effect was quite dramatic and quick. REally awesome.
I think this will help you too. I found out about White Flower as a decongestant when I worked at Brazos Natural Foods. Repeatedly, mothers would come in and buy it for their children. Each swore by the stuff. I remember one mother coming in and telling me all she had to do was put one or two drops on her toddlers shirt front, and viola, her daughter was congestion free throughout the day. She would repeat this at night. Stories like that stay with you as an employee. So much positive effect for so little money.
I would give you a company link to hit, but they don't have one. Their telephone number is (650) 591-9465, if you want to find out who carries it close to where you live.
Hope this helps you too! It is a lot of bang for the buck. Good Luck!
You can buy White Flower at your health food store. I tried attaching a picture to my blog so that you could know what you are looking for, but for some reason, blogger is cooperating with me today. It is a tiny box and often hard to find. Ask for it. Even new emplyees know where it is because it is asked for so much.
And White Flower is quite a bargain at $4.99 for .34 fluid ounces, when very little will last a while. For me, depending on how decongested I am, I have smeared the stuff on my upper chest (very decongested) , or put a few drops on my shirt (not so decongested).
White Flower is a blend of essential oils that work: 40% wintergreen, 15% menthol, 6% Camphor, with inactive ingredients listed as eucalyptus, lavender and peppermint. These may be inactive for pain but not for nasal and chest congestion. I know from past experiences that eucalyptus and peppermint are powerful decongestants and that lavender is a powerful antiviral, anti fungal, antibacterial agent. Somehow this whole combination works great, and is much cheaper than if you were to buy the essential oils individually, at about an average of $10 each, and combine them.
Within about five minutes of applying White Flower, I can breathe better and my nose starts running.(decongestant) Within about fifteen minutes. after blowing my nose a few times, I am breathing without hearing that rattle trap stuff going on in my chest (expectorant).
And quite frankly, those first days when I felt much worse, I even spread some on my cheek where my sinuses are, keeping my eyes closed for about fifteen minutes. It does but the eyes a bit, but oh my, the effect was quite dramatic and quick. REally awesome.
I think this will help you too. I found out about White Flower as a decongestant when I worked at Brazos Natural Foods. Repeatedly, mothers would come in and buy it for their children. Each swore by the stuff. I remember one mother coming in and telling me all she had to do was put one or two drops on her toddlers shirt front, and viola, her daughter was congestion free throughout the day. She would repeat this at night. Stories like that stay with you as an employee. So much positive effect for so little money.
I would give you a company link to hit, but they don't have one. Their telephone number is (650) 591-9465, if you want to find out who carries it close to where you live.
Hope this helps you too! It is a lot of bang for the buck. Good Luck!
Saturday, August 2, 2008
High Blood Pressure, Low Brain Function
I love Daniel Amen, M.D. Get on his mailing list and you will always have the most up to date information about the brain, avaiable with every email you open from him. This was in todays' email. Since high blood pressure is the silent killer, (showing no symptoms), it makes sense to always get your blood pressure checked to also make sure you have great brain function. This is a study from Russia. Here is Dr. Amen's blog:
High Blood Pressure, Low Brain Function — Treat Hypertension to Have a Great Brain
Here is a fascinating research study from Russia on the importance of taking care of your blood pressure. High blood pressure decreases blood flow to your brain and impairs concentration and other cognitive processes. Lose weight, exercise and get hypertension treated!!“The aim of our study was to estimate brain perfusion and cognitive function (CF) in patients with arterial hypertension (AH) before and after hypotensive therapy. The study included 15 patients (mean age, 53.0+/-5.7 years) with previously untreated or ineffectively treated essential hypertension of the second degree.
All patients underwent brain single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) scanning with 99mTc-hexamethylpropylene amine oxime (99mTc-HMPAO) and comprehensive neuropsychological testing before and after 24 weeks of hypotensive therapy (angiotensin-converting enzyme [ACE] inhibitor or diuretics). The brain perfusion was significantly lower (15-22%) in all regions of AH patients. These patients showed a 25% decrease in attention and psychomotor speed as well as a 14% decrease in mentation. Six months of hypotensive therapy led to an increase in brain perfusion by an average of 7-11% in all brain regions. After treatment these patients demonstrated an average 11-18% improvements in attention and psychomotor speed, as well as an average 10% improvement in abstract mentation.
Marked signs of brain hypoperfusion and impaired CF: decrease in attention, slowing psychomotor speed and mentation was found in hypertensive patients even without focal neurological symptomatology. Twenty-four weeks of hypotensive treatment with ACE inhibitors or diuretics had a positive effect on cerebral perfusion and led to CF improvement.
Reference: Efimova IY, Efimova NY, Triss SV, Lishmanov YB. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Institute of Cardiology, Tomsk Research Center, Tomsk, Russia. nuclear@cardio.tsu.ru. Brain perfusion and cognitive function changes in hypertensive patients. Hypertens Res. 2008 Apr;31(4):673-8.
This entry was posted on Saturday, July 19th, 2008 at 3:17 pm and is filed under Brain Discussion. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
One Response to “High Blood Pressure, Low Brain Function — Treat Hypertension to Have a Great Brain”
David Cox, DC Says:
July 25th, 2008 at 12:16 pm
How about this title: Low Brain Function Causes Hypertension - Treat Low Brain Function to Have A Great Brain!
Low brain function has multifactorial causes: poor sensory integration; diminished sensory stimulation from lack of movement; dysafferentation from dysuse of the brain itself; dysfunctional motor unit integrity; some drugs, to name a few.
Decreased cortical stimulation allows disinhibition of the pontomedullary reticular formation’s inhibitory affect on the intermedial lateral cell column which results in escape of the sympathetic system, producing hypertension among other concomitants.
Increased stimulation from peripheral receptors increases cortical frequency of firing which in turn increases pontomedullary reticular inhibition to the IML, thereby reducing all sympathetic concomitants.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
High Blood Pressure, Low Brain Function — Treat Hypertension to Have a Great Brain
Here is a fascinating research study from Russia on the importance of taking care of your blood pressure. High blood pressure decreases blood flow to your brain and impairs concentration and other cognitive processes. Lose weight, exercise and get hypertension treated!!“The aim of our study was to estimate brain perfusion and cognitive function (CF) in patients with arterial hypertension (AH) before and after hypotensive therapy. The study included 15 patients (mean age, 53.0+/-5.7 years) with previously untreated or ineffectively treated essential hypertension of the second degree.
All patients underwent brain single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) scanning with 99mTc-hexamethylpropylene amine oxime (99mTc-HMPAO) and comprehensive neuropsychological testing before and after 24 weeks of hypotensive therapy (angiotensin-converting enzyme [ACE] inhibitor or diuretics). The brain perfusion was significantly lower (15-22%) in all regions of AH patients. These patients showed a 25% decrease in attention and psychomotor speed as well as a 14% decrease in mentation. Six months of hypotensive therapy led to an increase in brain perfusion by an average of 7-11% in all brain regions. After treatment these patients demonstrated an average 11-18% improvements in attention and psychomotor speed, as well as an average 10% improvement in abstract mentation.
Marked signs of brain hypoperfusion and impaired CF: decrease in attention, slowing psychomotor speed and mentation was found in hypertensive patients even without focal neurological symptomatology. Twenty-four weeks of hypotensive treatment with ACE inhibitors or diuretics had a positive effect on cerebral perfusion and led to CF improvement.
Reference: Efimova IY, Efimova NY, Triss SV, Lishmanov YB. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Institute of Cardiology, Tomsk Research Center, Tomsk, Russia. nuclear@cardio.tsu.ru. Brain perfusion and cognitive function changes in hypertensive patients. Hypertens Res. 2008 Apr;31(4):673-8.
This entry was posted on Saturday, July 19th, 2008 at 3:17 pm and is filed under Brain Discussion. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
One Response to “High Blood Pressure, Low Brain Function — Treat Hypertension to Have a Great Brain”
David Cox, DC Says:
July 25th, 2008 at 12:16 pm
How about this title: Low Brain Function Causes Hypertension - Treat Low Brain Function to Have A Great Brain!
Low brain function has multifactorial causes: poor sensory integration; diminished sensory stimulation from lack of movement; dysafferentation from dysuse of the brain itself; dysfunctional motor unit integrity; some drugs, to name a few.
Decreased cortical stimulation allows disinhibition of the pontomedullary reticular formation’s inhibitory affect on the intermedial lateral cell column which results in escape of the sympathetic system, producing hypertension among other concomitants.
Increased stimulation from peripheral receptors increases cortical frequency of firing which in turn increases pontomedullary reticular inhibition to the IML, thereby reducing all sympathetic concomitants.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
